20030728

No democracy in China is tragic

By Chang Ching-hsi

The case of Hong Kong's anti-sedition legislation, which has been temporarily suspended due to massive opposition, enables one to see clearly that the territory's fundamental problem lies with Beijing. As long as China remains undemocratic, similar problems will persist. In fact, Taiwan's social instability also has its roots in an undemocratic China.

It was very heartening to see a 500,000-strong protest in Hong Kong taking to the streets to oppose the Article 23 legislation. Many people used to think that Hong Kong's commercial society only cares about making money and ignores politics. But a good portion of the demonstrators came from the middle class. The "middle-class effect" seems to be taking shape: after gaining economic independence, people turn around to demand political democracy.

However, it won't be easy for this effect to take shape in China. This is because wealthy Chinese people have made their fortunes through political privileges, and they dare not demand democratic reform after achieving economic independence. There is also another important reason -- Hong Kong is an area with free circulation of information, allowing its people to obtain news from a plethora of sources with varying viewpoints. In stark contrast, information exchange in China is muzzled.

People in China were denied access to the news of the demonstration and the large crowds turning up at the July 1 demonstration because China imposed a news blackout on non-official news about Hong Kong when people started to congregate. Phoenix TV reported on the activity attended by 60,000 people to celebrate Hong Kong's return to Chinese rule but said nothing about the 500,000-people demonstration. China's newspapers made no mention of the massive protest.

Internet users said they would have thought that July 1 was a peaceful and joyful day in Hong Kong if they had only received news from China's TV programs and newspapers.

Conflicting opinions are often seen and heard in Taiwan's legislature or among the public. Different opinions do not cause social instability, but a lack of mutual trust. Worries that some are selling out Taiwan under the table while pandering to the locals above board fosters this kind of mistrust, and therefore an undemocratic China is the root of this mutual distrust. If China is democratized, this mutual distrust can then be eliminated.

The information blackout in China allows the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to distort truth and weave webs of lies. Recently, several TV stations in Taiwan reported that a person in China's Zhejiang Province had poisoned more than 10 beggars and homeless people to death. They also said this culprit is a Falun Gong member and that, according to Falun Gong theory, being a beggar is humanity's highest state and that killing beggars can enhance their practice.

Such blatant lies are very easy to see through. If the theory is correct, then why haven't Taiwan's hundreds of thousands of Falun Gong practitioners rushed to become beggars before killing each other?

An international organization probing into the persecution of Falun Gong members made phone calls to the region where the murders occurred. It found out that when local police were still investigating the case, the Xinhua News Agency had already reported on its Web site that the killer was a Falun Gong follower.

The CCP is so lacking in talent that it is even incapable of telling lies, as evident in the self-immolation case in Tiananmen Square in 2000. Using slow motion, one can even tell from the footage broadcast on China Central Television that those reported to have burned themselves were actually beaten to death on the spot.

But surprisingly, these lies, even full of flaws, can still be used to fool people in China.

In a democracy, the people are the bosses. We cannot decide China's future on behalf of the Chinese people. But we can pass on the truth into China so that they may have adequate information to decide their own future. Once China is democratized, the root cause of Taiwan's social instability will also be eradicated.

Chang Ching-hsi is a professor in the department of economics at National Taiwan University.

TSU poll reveals majority supports national plebiscite

CNA , TAIPEI

More than half of the respondents to a recent opinion poll support the holding of a referendum on Taiwan's future status, the TSU said yesterday.

The TSU legislative caucus conducted a telephone survey of randomly chosen adults from July 15 to July 20 to explore their opinions about referendum legislation and other related topics. A total of 1,095 valid replies were collected, with a margin of error of 3 percent.

According to the poll results, 68 percent of the respondents said they support the enactment of a referendum bill to pave the way for the holding of referendums. As to the title of the proposed legislation, 46.94 percent said it should be dubbed "the referendum law," while 20.64 percent said they would prefer to see it designated as the "initiative and referendum law."

The DPP administration is planning to hold a landmark referendum before or on the day of the next presidential election -- March 20 next year -- to decide whether construction of a controversial half-completed nuclear power plant should be scrapped or continued.

The TSU poll found that 57.16 percent of the respondents gave a thumbs-up to the proposal that a referendum be held to decide whether Taiwan should declare independence or unify with China, while 34.24 percent said they oppose such a proposal.

If a referendum on changing the nation's official designation from the Republic of China to Taiwan were to be held, 46.21 percent said they would support the proposal, but a roughly equal 44.1 percent gave a thumbs-down to the idea.

Asked if the Legislative Yuan should fail to complete referendum legislation during its next session scheduled to open in September, 57.35 percent said they would back a Cabinet plan to formulate a provisional package of regulations to lay a framework for holding a "consultative referendum" to deliver on President Chen Shui-bian's campaign promise. Nevertheless, 31.51 percent said they would oppose the proposal.

Seventy-three percent said they support the holding of referendums on major public construction projects, but 18 percent said they are opposed to holding such referendums.

Meanwhile, 57.45 percent endorsed a proposal to hold a consultative referendum on Taiwan's bid to join the World Health Organization on the day of the next presidential election even if the legislature fails to pass a referendum bill, while 32.23 gave a negative reply.

Analyzing the poll results, TSU Deputy Secretary-General Chen Hung-chi said holding referendums on major policy issues or public construction projects has become mainstream public opinion.

"Since referendum is a basic civil right prescribed in our Constitution, the legislature should not continue stonewalling the passage of a referendum bill," Chen said.

Lilley urges nation to make business, not war with China

LOW PROFILE: The former US ambassador to China said that Taiwan could play a major role in the future of East Asia if it stays clear of conflict in the Taiwan Strait

By Roger Liu

STAFF REPORTER

"What does the referendum do for you? What does it clarify? It's very important to examine oneself as to why it's being done. "－James Lilley, former US ambassador to China

Speaking at the launch of his new book, former US ambassador to China and former American Intstitute in Taiwan director, James Lilley, yesterday said disputes between Taiwan and China are better solved through greater business interactions.

"Make business, not war," said Lilley, who was born in the seaport town of Qingdao in northeast China. Lilley also said there should be a peaceful resolution between the two sides of strait.

Lilley urged Taiwan to keep a low profile while focusing on economic development.

"Don't go too far to provoke China. China may provoke you, but don't get on the wrong side of this one," Lilley said.

"We're shooting with each other, and in 2003 it's all about making money. War is bad for business," he said.

"Now you have thinkers and visionaries like [former KMT vice chairman] Vincent Siew who tries to use the EU's formula to deal with China," said Lilley. "[Vice Premier] Qian Qi-chen is talking about a free trade area. There is something happening there."

Lilley mapped out a future scenario for East Asia in which three important hubs exist -- two in China and one in Taiwan.

Lilley said the Yangtze Delta and the combination of Hong Kong and Shenzhen would play an important role in the economic development of East Asia.

"Half-a-million Taiwanese businessmen live in Shanghai now," said Lilley, quoting John Chang, the illegitimate son of late president Chiang Ching-kuo.

But Lilley also said he was worried a referendum may prevent Taiwan's economy from developing further.

"Referendums are not a good way to do business," said Lilley, when asked how Taiwan should resolve the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant dispute. "This is a very complex decision that doesn't lend itself to a simple answer," he said.

"What does the referendum do for you? What does it clarify? It's very important to examine oneself as to why it's being done." he said, "There is a lot of noise being made [on the nuclear power issue]. It's time for the pragmatist to come out, not the idealist."

He reiterated the US government's stance of non-intervention on the Taiwan-China issue

Lilley thinks that the US is "not smart enough" to get involved in something so complicated.

"When I get involved with China, I realize how much I don't know about it. You know what the Chinese concerns are. What they are really concerned about is the referendum of independence," he said.

"Your president said very clearly in his inauguration address, `I will not have a referendum on the status of Taiwan as long as the situation is peaceful.' I presume that's still the stance [of Taiwan]," he said.

In their decades-long political struggle, the Taiwanese have made great strides in gaining freedom and democracy. The time has come now for their push to claim once and for all the full right of self-determination. The means to the end is, of course, referendums. The past offers a preview of the future.

In his 14-point address to the US Congress in January 1918, President Woodrow Wilson introduced the groundbreaking concept of self-determination. After World War I, the principle of self-determination was to become the guiding light for people under autocratic and alien rule.

The Allies' military victory over the Central Powers and the subsequent Versailles Peace Treaty, that was based very much on Wilson's 14 Points, led the defeat of Imperial Germany and the autocratic Austrian-Hungarian and Ottoman empires were broken up and most subjugated ethnic minority groups were allowed independence on the basis of self-determination in the next decade or two.

The principle and practice of self-determination have become so widely accepted as a fundamental right of all peoples that after World War II it was written into the charter of the UN. As a result, with the exception of a few cases most colonial powers fairly rapidly, one after another, ended their colonial rule and allowed independence to their former colonies.

The collapse of communism in Eastern Europe in late 1980s and the slackening of East-West Cold-War tensions prefigured the dismemberment of both the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. Over ten former Soviet republics became independent, sovereign nation-states by the end of 1991. Compared with the relatively peaceful break-up of the Soviet Union, that of Yugoslavia was violent, but four breakaway republics, Macedonia, Slovenia, Croatia and Bosnia, did eventually become independent.

Finally, the UN has also played a role in making independence possible in a few cases. The most recent case is East Timor, which had been forcefully annexed by Indonesia in 1976. After over two decades of struggle for self-determination, the East Timorese were finally allowed on Aug. 30, 1999 to vote whether to remain as part of Indonesia or declare independence. In the UN-monitored plebiscite, more than 78 percent of those who cast their votes chose to break with Indonesia. On May 20, 2002, East Timor officially became the first new country of the 21st century.

As discussed, the century after 1918 is to a great extent a century of nation-states founded on the Wilsonian principle of self-determination. Now let's turn our attention to the case of Taiwan.

Taiwan was a Japanese colony from 1895, when China ceded the island to Japan, to 1945, when the defeated Japan surrendered to the Allies. From 1945 to 1952, Taiwan was a Japanese territory under the Allied military occupation. The former supreme commander of the Allied forces in the Pacific theater former general Douglas MacArthur, however, had assigned the task of actual occupation of Taiwan to the Chiang Kai-shek-led army of the Republic of China. In October 1949, the People's Republic of China was founded while the leader of Republic of China Chiang fled to Taiwan with his supporters and began nearly forty years of an illegal martial law regime on Taiwan. Technically, Taiwan was still a Japanese territory until Japan formally renounced its sovereign right by virtue of the San Francisco Peace Treaty that Japan signed in 1951.

Since 1952, the status of Taiwan had thus remained undecided. It must be settled by peaceful means and based upon the principle of self-determination as prescribed in the charter of the UN. In 1987 the Chiang-imposed martial rule came to an end and democracy had its beginning when a native-born Taiwanese -- Lee Teng-hui -- succeeded the presidency in 1988. Then in 1996, the people of Taiwan exercised their right of self-determination by directly electing Lee their president.

By most international standards, Taiwan is an independent and sovereign nation. The PRC's attempt to annex Taiwan is no different from Hitler Germany's Anschluss plan, which ultimately resulted in the annexation of Austria in 1938. Before the forced annexation, Hitler had prevented the implementation of then-Austrian chancellor Schuschnigg's plan for a national plebiscite to decide in favor of Austrian independence. It was only with the defeat of Nazi Germany in 1945 that Austria was liberated to become an independent, sovereign nation again.

Beijing's "one country, two systems" formula is indeed a sugarcoated version of Hitler's plan to annex Austria.

The widespread discontent in Hong Kong was fully demonstrated in the July 1 protest. Hong Kong is ready for wider democracy while the Beijing appointed Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa and his administration lack legitimacy. In addition, the unemployment rate has shot up to over 10 percent and real estates values have dropped by 60 percent.

The people of Hong Kong are faring a lot worse today than before the Chinese takeover. Clearly, the Taiwanese are aware of the worsening development in Hong Kong. How can China's offer of the same "one country, two systems" formula have any appeal to the Taiwanese? In fact, public opinion polls in the island nation have shown that over 70 percent of the Taiwanese asked have rejected China's annexation formula for Taiwan.

The people of Taiwan have the right to choose their own destiny. What better means for making known their decision is there than a national plebiscite? Taiwan must soon pass a national referendum law so that the people can directly participate in the decision of their nation's major policies, including Taiwan's relations with China. It is the legal as well as moral obligation of "the people of the United Nations," in the words of the UN Charter Preamble, to support the freedom-loving Taiwanese in exercising the UN-guaranteed right of self-determination.

Ching-chih Chen is a Professor Emeritus of History at Southern Illinois University-Edwardsville and a member of North America Taiwanese Professors' Association